How Racist Are You?

So. How racist are you? That's the question asked by an online psychology test by the University of Chicago. The test involves showing you a series of photographs of 100 black or white men, either holding guns or cellphones. You have to decide - in a split second - whether to shoot them or to holster your gun.

Nicholas D. Kristof, a (white) columnist of The New York Times took the test. And discovered this:

I shot armed blacks in an average of 0.679 seconds, while I waited slightly longer — .694 seconds — to shoot armed whites. Conversely, I holstered my gun more quickly when encountering unarmed whites than unarmed blacks.

Take the test yourself and you’ll probably find that you show bias as well. Most whites and many blacks are more quick to shoot blacks, no matter how egalitarian they profess to be.

Eric L. Hinton of Diversity Inc, who is black, also took the test, and found out the same thing:

But what concerns me is that, armed or not, I "shot" Black targets faster than I shot white targets. I shot Black armed targets at an average of 0.631 seconds versus white armed targets at 0.662. Even more disturbing - I shot Black unarmed targets at an average of 0.783 seconds versus white unarmed targets at 0.792.

Fractions of seconds? Yes, but still unsettling when you consider the real life implications of armed police officers who make these life and death decisions in real life situations as they encounter Black men on the street.

So, how would you do? Just how racist are you? Take the test and find out!

(I did horribly on the test - I shot practically everyone, black or white! Then I got nervous, and got shot by everyone else!)

I took the test and showed the same bias as the columnist. But I also shot two unarmed whites while I only shot one unarmed black. Very interesting test, although I know I'm not racist.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Totally inconsistet result on my side; I am pretty sure I only concentrated on the gun and that the color of the skin did not make any difference. I am quite good at abstracting, and concentrating, though.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
So a difference in average reaction time that is less than a hundredth of a second equals racism now?

Racism would be if you take the test and shoot all black people or all white people regardless of weaponry.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I had slower reaction times vs. blacks on all counts. I accidentally shot one white and one black, and got shot several times.

When I was taking the test I don't think I consciously registered whether most of them were black or white; I was looking for the gun.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I think all this "test" proves is that the creator was racist. It seemed like every time there was more than 2 armed individuals strung together they were mostly black, yet armed whites were always following a sequence of unarmed people. I have a feeling this stringing people together lessens our reaction time in each subsequent image effectively skewing the results to make everyone look racist.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
figured it out.. in portugal its the ~ instead of the /

Game Over
Your Score: 485
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:583.44ms
Black Unarmed:710.8ms
White Armed:631.96ms
White Unarmed:691.36ms
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I'm more checking out peoples reaction times than worrying about being racist...

Game Over
Your Score: 170
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:605.16ms
Black Unarmed:770.4ms
White Armed:641.64ms
White Unarmed:768.4ms
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Game Over
Your Score: 535
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:610.36ms
Black Unarmed:697.6ms
White Armed:604.12ms
White Unarmed:624.2ms

So it took me longer to holster my gun for an unarmed black man. But I was more quick to shoot the white guys with the guns!

I was looking for the gun rather than skin colour, anyway.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I'm white, and I got...

Black Armed:676.24ms
Black Unarmed:707.44ms
White Armed:627.88ms
White Unarmed:735.84ms

Was I biased by the fact that I knew the premise of the game before playing it? Probably. Did I gun down about 6 innocent cell phone users? Uh...
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
It doesn't read my / or z for some reason.

Also, one shouldn't shoot someone just because they are holding a gun. You should only shoot them if they threaten you or someone else with the gun or another weapon.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Oh dear... heee heee hee, I got a negative score :P

Game Over
Your Score: -570
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:713.88ms
Black Unarmed:743.6ms
White Armed:681.12ms
White Unarmed:689.48ms

However, I'm not racist, and I know it, so, uh, it must be fluked! :)
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
What a flawed test. There was more than one time when I thought gun or not in my head and accidentally pressed the wrong key.

I never once looked at the face of the person I was shooting or not shooting, I was just looking for a hand, and then to see what was in that hand.

The silhouettes of the black/white people were not a control of the study... they were a variable. You can't make valid scientific observations when it's harder to see if there's a gun in somebody's hand because of how they are standing. Or because the gun is black and their shirt is black... kind of hard to make out the outline of the object and determine if it is a gun.

Game Over
Your Score: 530
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:602.44ms
Black Unarmed:777.16ms
White Armed:571.12ms
White Unarmed:725.64ms

And I highly doubt these results are of any statistical significance. Human reaction time often varies in that 30ms range.

You could do this test with lions and tigers or cats and dogs and see results like this.

AND, correlation is not causation.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
something else i find interesting - the game encourages violence. You get more points for shooting an armed person (10) then you do for sparing an unarmed person (5).
Similarly, you lose less point for shooting an unarmed person (15), then you do for not shooting an armed person (40). (granted, this aspect could reflect risking your own life, but shooting innocents is pretty bad).

I have to agree about positioning. Some people in this game are holding their cans of sode in really strange position. Also, it would be easier (and more realistic) to make a decision if the person was animated and swinging the obect to 'take aim'. Most rational people woulding aim their 'soda' at you like a gun (and those do in real life are basically knowingly commiting suicide).
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Your Score: 190
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:769.08ms
Black Unarmed:965.92ms
White Armed:743.64ms
White Unarmed:791.68ms

I found the pictures of denver to be distracting. I lived there very briefly. so I kept trying to figure out where the picture was taken.

Sometimes the color of the shirt and the poses they are in makes it hard to see what's going on too.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
When I started the test, I thought the goal was to look at the person and determine if they were going to shoot you, regardless of gun or phone in hand. You know, like if someone is holding a gun for a legit reason while innocent, or a guy has a cell phone to distract you from the gun he's got in his other hand. So, half of the test I was judging the "character" or "motive" of the person, not what was in hand. Then I realized that the "innocent" ones had phones, and the "shooters" had guns. When I realized that, I started shooting the guns, not the person holding them.

I guess that means the test is racist/speciesist against phones or guns. While fun, the test is horribly flawed.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Game Over
Your Score: 510
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:630.28ms
Black Unarmed:723.04ms
White Armed:650.04ms
White Unarmed:670.2ms

Arab boy growing up in America.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Racism? One-one hundredth of a second? Give me the grant money, I'd like this job. If you would like a good example of racism come to Philadelphia. Whites, blacks, hispanics and asians (is the order of ethnicity racist?) all crowded into so-called, what used to be "neighborhoods". Nutter, the current mayor, recently had a city-wide clean-up because of the elections, full well knowing that the "City of Brotherly Love" would be in the national focus. Elections are over; "Filthy-delphia" once again reigns. Ride the "El"; walk the streets. If you're white be careful of the neighborhoods you visit. Please don't tell me about racism.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I guess my keyboard is an NRA fanatic...

I held down the / key the whole time... for some reason it shot unarmed pictures 25% faster... I dunno... maybe my keyboard hiccuped for a second.

Game Over
Your Score: -500
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:58.56ms
Black Unarmed:46ms
White Armed:61.92ms
White Unarmed:45.92ms
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Game Over
Your Score: 540
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:781.4ms
Black Unarmed:798.56ms
White Armed:737.56ms
White Unarmed:751.36ms

All the test proved to me is that it was harder to discern a dark handgun in the hands of a black man than a white man which seems like common sense. Moral of the story is that if you don't want to get accidentally shot, buy a very brightly colored phone.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
first time i took it, i kept forgetting which key was which and i kept accidentally shooting the wrong person!

then my computer froze up. :/

gonna try and take it again...
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Game Over
Your Score: 625
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:757.6ms
Black Unarmed:753.24ms
White Armed:736.28ms
White Unarmed:757.12ms

What disturbed me most was how poor my reaction times are. I don't think there's any statistically significant difference in my times.

Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
drayzel's comment says something. on average, at a held down button, blacks get shot quicker. it's not supposed to happen that way now should it?

Your Score: 620
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:613.4ms
Black Unarmed:691.2ms
White Armed:633.84ms
White Unarmed:688.16ms
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
oops. nevermind. here's a new set of SHOOT-ALL results:

Your Score: -500
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:30.76ms
Black Unarmed:30.92ms
White Armed:30.44ms
White Unarmed:30.84ms

they're pretty close. except the armed white ones die quickest.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
While I think it's critical that people inspect their implicit associations as a way of confronting the things we are quietly in our culture, I don't think that having a difference in these reaction times indicates you're a "racist". How you act determines whether you are racist; what your subconscious tells you is a piece of this but not the whole story.

Understanding your subconscious is a way of being LESS racist, I think, and I worry that people who see these tests as "am I racist?" tests are less likely to do the important risk of taking them.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
This is not racism, is social conditioning.

If you take this test to a location where the perceived threats are different (for example, a neighborhood in Ghana where people from a well-known violent gang wear red shirts) and substitute the pictures of black people (which would be pretty meaningless in Ghana) with the pictures of people of any ethnicity wearing red shirts, the same results will happen, this time with people shooting the ones in red shirts more freely.

Blame the governments that allow poverty to exist and turn into crime, and the media for taking advantage of this and reinforcing every stereotype for the sake of immediate consumption. Not our highly evolved, completely positive, survival skills.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I thought I'd have a little fun by doing a little role playing. First I played the pacifist left-wing weasel, and kept my weapon holstered the whole time by holding the Z button. If we follow the Jimmy Carter example, we need to negotiate with these guys; after all, they have feelings too.

Your Score: -1750
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:58.4ms
Black Unarmed:54.4ms
White Armed:53.28ms
White Unarmed:56.2ms

My score sucked, and to add injury to insult, I was shot more times than I'd care to count. And that usually means you're dead. Hmmm.

So then I thought I'd play the stereotypical right-wing gun-nut, shooting everybody that got in my way...

Your Score: -500
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:60.48ms
Black Unarmed:55.16ms
White Armed:68.2ms
White Unarmed:55.72ms

So I guess the moral of this story is that if you try and talk with thugs, not only does your score suck, but you get filled with lead. But if you shoot first & ask questions later, you end up scoring better than the weasel, and you get the added bonus of staying alive.

Or maybe this is just a seriously flawed test. Yeah, I think that's it.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
here's the problem with this test:
it implies that shooting blacks faster means you're racist against black people.

i took the test and i shot whites faster. does that mean i'm racist against white people?

worst test ever.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Game Over
Your Score: 545
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:660.08ms
Black Unarmed:844.56ms
White Armed:670.96ms
White Unarmed:784.48ms

I get what they are trying ot do but still..

horrible test
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
What's missing from the test is accuracy.

From a timing perspective, I scored:

Average reaction time:
Black Armed:624.08ms
Black Unarmed:668ms
White Armed:616.8ms
White Unarmed:632.84ms

indicating I was quicker to shoot white people than black. However, it's just as (if not more) relevant to know whether I accurately shot gun-toting maniacs than cellphone-wielding ones. For example, if I were racist I might have shot every black man I saw, bar one, which wouldn't be apparent from the above statistics.

I know from a statistical research standpoint the stated test is on one element (gun or no gun?), but for the overall you need to consider all the factors. Does the application track this and report back to the author?
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Your Score: 400
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:628.56ms
Black Unarmed:690.6ms
White Armed:619ms
White Unarmed:656.84ms

I guess this means I like shooting white people better than black people, but I'm more willing to disassociate white people with guns than black people. Now what if we complicate this a little more by throwing in pictures of Asians and Latinos?
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I once heard someone say that racism is like body odor. Everybody has it; some people just have better control over it than others, and some days it's easier to control than other days.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Honestly I found it difficult to identify dark guns on the black and light guns on the white. Most of the time I have no idea what race I am looking at since I am focused on just the hand and it would be either the cloths were dark or light and not the person.

Game Over
Your Score: 350
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:742.48ms
Black Unarmed:715.28ms
White Armed:619.56ms
White Unarmed:659.8ms

I guess those results mean I am quicker to not shoot and shoot a white person than a black.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Score: 615
Black Armed: 731.76 ms
Black Unarmed: 1010.52 ms
White Armed: 732.72 ms
White Unarmed: 819.2 ms

East Asian Male here. While it's around the same time for me to recognize a gun, it takes time to tell if a cellphone or a wallet is a gun or not. And since most guns are black, it takes me a whole second to tell a civilian. That's not racism, that's just the unfortunate color of guns!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Game Over
Your Score: 285
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:563.84ms
Black Unarmed:642ms
White Armed:532.08ms
White Unarmed:788.88ms

So as a white guy I'm racist against whites?!?!

I bet if I took this again I would get a completely different result.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Your Score: 565
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:600.92ms
Black Unarmed:716.88ms
White Armed:660.4ms
White Unarmed:727.28ms

Basically even, I'd say. This test is really flawed. You really concentrate on their hands, and you don't have any time to even notice the colour of their skin. Why all men? This test is sexist.

This is probably good Starfleet training - they keep beaming people down in front of you.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
If you focus on the positioning and color of the weapon as apposed to the implied bias on the participants part its clear to me the bias lies in the color and pose of the weapon vs the the contrasting elements that make up the test (i.e. the black weapons vs metallic and the pose and coloring of the participant and clothing) its all about contrast vs visual acuity, not about racism.

Game Over
Your Score: 700
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:655.04ms
Black Unarmed:755ms
White Armed:653.92ms
White Unarmed:719.8ms
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
This test is so obviously flawed in many ways, while it's an iteresting concept, (and much of me believes an actual study may provide results akin to this), this test is far from scientific. There are many instances where it's more a matter of placing a dark object against a dark background and anyone creating a test like this could easily create it to actually come back looking as if the players were bias due to there responses when really they were "led" to these decisions by the test itself. BTW, it was also just some random game without any known affiliation to an accredited school, organization, or criminal justice system or academy...Maybe just some guy that wants to make white people look racist to further his own agenda, sitting in his basement, thinking,"oh I'll get 'em looking bad with this", lol.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I read an article way back that brings to mind a name, Bayes. Wikipedia lists Thomas Bayes "(c. 1702 – April 17, 1761) a British mathematician and Presbyterian minister..."

The article (or commentary?) proposed that such judgments supposedly tested in the above experiment may not be racism but, instead, "Bayesian" judgments. To wit:

1. You are walking down a sidewalk and you see a 60 year-old black man coming your way. If you cross the street to the other sidewalk, you are a racist.

2. You are walking down a sidewalk and you see a 40 year-old black woman coming your way. If you cross the street to the other sidewalk, you are a racist.

3. You are walking down a sidewalk and you see a 20 year-old black man coming your way. If you cross the street to the other sidewalk, >>> it is possible that you are not displaying racism but Bayesian thinking.

The idea is that basing decisions on data of who are the predominant perpetrators of violent crime as opposed to basing them on the race of a person without concern for any further consideration of any data or critical thinking, marks the difference between racism and Bayesian thinking in this example.

It may well be that the racism has occurred much earlier in the process: is it a media slant, whether conscious or not?
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
According to my test results I'm a racist who hates white men. I'm so Irish I'm not even white, I'm translucent and I don't think I have any particular bias towards any racial group. The trouble I had with the test was that it was often very difficult for me to tell what the men were holding since the pictures were very small (the portion holding the item at least) and the colors were often very similar. Also, sometimes men holding cell phones seemed like they might be holding guns because some of the phones were very small and the antenna portion was fat and looked a bit like the barrel of a gun. I don't think this is a terribly realizable test. All it indicates to me is that the folks giving the test weren't very good at designing it.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Your Score: 535
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:645.96ms
Black Unarmed:709.96ms
White Armed:609.12ms
White Unarmed:744.64ms

Funnily enough, mine seems to be the opposite. I was more focused on the gun than not, but I found the gun/regular object more difficult to see when it was a white man holding it, for some reason.

I wonder, though, why are none of these people women? Is the game sexist?
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Everyone knows that the only way to not be racist is to join my facebook group. Which is called "I'm Not Racist".
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I found that attire seemed to affect my reaction the most. Suit and tie got a long look. I'd be nice to see the test done recording that as a variable also.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Your Score: 310
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:668.6ms
Black Unarmed:815.68ms
White Armed:619.36ms
White Unarmed:722.76ms

Your Score: 375
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:602.08ms
Black Unarmed:730.4ms
White Armed:612.08ms
White Unarmed:666.12ms

So I'm racist too? Don't think so, probably because it's easier to differentiate dark coloured mobile phones n wallets from guns in the hands of a white, easy as that.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Racism actually has a lot to do with priming. So for example if you sat for a couple hours watching Obama and really liked what he had to say and then went and took the test again you wouldn't shoot black people as quickly, you might even shoot white people faster. (Depending on what you think of Hilary Clinton I guess ;)
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I didn't notice what colour the shooters were but I found it much harder to spot and make a decision about an object - phone or gun (or coke can or wallet) if it was the same colour as the hand that held it.

So I was slow with silver guns or phones in white hands and black wallets, phones or guns in black hands. Where is the analysis of this reaction time. In fact I got shot a couple of times by white guys with silver guns, and I shot a few white guys with black phones.

Also some of the backgrounds made it hard to spot an object. I also found it a bit hard to "shoot" someone who was pointing the gun at the ground.

And the web connection was very very slow...
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Your Score: 465
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:625.16ms
Black Unarmed:741.96ms
White Armed:669.48ms
White Unarmed:706.16ms

I don't even know what my score means.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
definetly a flawed test. but interesting. after the first few people i stopped looking at the person and just looked for the gun/cell phone.

i noticed in some pictures it was harder to see the object.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I totally fail at this. I forgot what button to push, I couldn't see their hands before I got shot myself, and every time I didn't shoot an innocent was completely by luck. This just went too fast for me.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Interesting test, but very flawed.
I couldn't tell a few times if the person was holding a gun or phone or whatever else they were holding. SOmetimes b/c of the way they were holding it, sometimes b/c of the background and the item blending in to that or the person's clothing.
I didn't even notice skin color b/c I was trying too dang hard to tell what they were holding.

I shot a few of the good guys and let go a few of the bad ones :P heh
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Game Over
Your Score: 565
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:757.24ms
Black Unarmed:809.28ms
White Armed:745.28ms
White Unarmed:781.36ms

I got shot twice but I didn't shoot anyone by mistake. And look at that, I reacted to the armed white guys faster!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
As soon as I finished shooting people my computer crapped out, so I didn't get my score. BTW, why do you get more points for shooting the correct person, and less points for *not* shooting the correct person. The values of the people at U of C scare me.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I don't have a racist bone in my body and came up with similar reaction times even though in most pictures I didn't register the skin color, only looked for the weapon.

I found some pictures were really hard to make out the shape of the object due to the background the object was against. That, for me, had much more to do with analysis/reaction time than any other factor.

I would say the test is flawed, although it's a nice idea.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Game Over
Your Score: -1740
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:226.8ms
Black Unarmed:318.2ms
White Armed:200.84ms
White Unarmed:222ms

just held down the holster button.

I'm not going to even dignify this ass bung test with any worth at all.

How mad yank can you get, Who'd you shoot first?

Answer, NO ONE ya dummy, you shoot no one.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Game Over
Your Score: 615
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:5049.84ms
Black Unarmed:745.76ms
White Armed:636.12ms
White Unarmed:686.12ms

no idea how i got 5049.84ms on Black Armed. sounds a little too high.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Wow, look at all these concerns that these researchers -- who have made a career out of designing experiments and securing funding (i.e. justifying to funding agencies) for them -- forgot to account for when they designed the test! Good thing they have Neatorama readers to set them straight...

But seriously: for those of you calling the test "flawed", did you even stop to think about what it's really doing? It's not trying to tell you you're racist. (In fact, looking at the results on a person-by-person basis is pointless; I'm sure they are much more interested in the statistics of hundreds or thousands of people.)

Instead, it's trying to measure whether or not you have been subconsciously conditioned to perceive blacks as more threatening. That's why they used a variety of positions, settings, gun colors, etc. -- to statistically remove any biases that may be caused by these things. It's why cell-phones were sometimes held in threatening ways, to get rid of any biases you might have based on the way things are held. That's also why no women were used -- why complicate the results any more than necessary?

Is it realistic? Of course not. Reality has a way of complicating things. If it were possible to get the results they seek from realistic situations, they would simply study data from police reports or something.

Is it perfect? Again, no. Some of the points brought up by commenters here are valid. I'm sure the published study will acknowledge these issues as a potential source of error. But to insult the study, the people behind it, and even all of academia (see Evil Pundit) based on going through the subject's end of it a single time is ridiculous.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Where I live, people are likly to be shot by a black man with a gun than a white man. So, I'd be far more cautious when seeing a black man with a gun. That dosn't make me a racist, albeit idiots who make tests like this would want me to believe I am.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
You should have split this post so before you take the test, you don't see the results. I was going to take it but since i read the results, I think that would mess with my score.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Before I take this test I was reading the data and in general mostly blacks were shot weather unarmed or not. Since I live in NYC there was a trail of several police offers some of them being black shot and killed a unarmed man and injured several of his friends. In saying that I am sure some people of color(me being one of them)the scores would be some what different here in NYC
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Your score: 25
Average reaction time:
Black armed:844.76ms
Black unarmed: 1126.36ms
White armed:987.48ms
White unarmed:1003.84ms

Apparently I am very slow. So slow that by the time I found their hand and identified what was in it, I didn't have time to look at their faces. They could've been blue for all I knew!

That being said, the results show I'm not racist, right? (white female)

Maybe I'll change my contacts and take it again...
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:883.8ms
Black Unarmed:1050.88ms
White Armed:894.2ms
White Unarmed:1083.72ms
It was a very hard test, I hate guns.
So this means I am a racist (I'm white, actually very white and almost nothing helps:-( )? It is so strange... by the way I recognized, that blacks with guns came after the whites with guns. So when I saw a white-gun, I was thinking what to press, but when right after then came a black with gun I knew much faster which button I should press, so the reaction was faster... So I do not know if I can believe to this...
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
The test seemed like it could be biased although it is hard to tell while attempting to rush through. Some of the subjects did not appear to be "black" or "white." Who determined the classifications? Some objects were unclear against the background while some were quite obvious. Was this equal between the two racial distinctions? All this proves is that we (the test author included) still feel that skin color is a valid way of separating ourselves. Even disregarding that within their own test there are many subjects who could easily be classified as both or neither option.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Your Score: 335
Average reaction time:
Black Armed:767.12ms
Black Unarmed:828.12ms
White Armed:758.6ms
White Unarmed:838.92ms

I think I can just assume I'd be dead. :)

Fastest on armed whites and slowest on unarmed whites.

I'm not sure how to read this. And I think the amount of false positives might be a better indicator than anything else.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
This is RIDICULOUS! The recent media intoxication with race (inspired by B. Obama and his ex-pastor) -- and exacerbated by other sickos (such as A. Sharpton) is just depressing. It's sad to see that some bloggers are just as unencumbered by brain power as the ultra-left-wing reporters.

The fact is that there is no shame, no bias, no racism ... involved in shooting so-called "blacks" more or more quickly than so-called "whites." It is not done out of hatred, but out of wisdom and a sense of self-preservation. Anyone with a lick of sense knows that an average "black" man is FAR more likely to be a perpetrator of a violent crime than an average "white" man. It's only natural to use self-defense against him with less hesitation.

Grow up, people!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
This test is flawed in a number of ways, The most obvious of which is hand association. By binding one hand to white, and the other to black, there will be a startling upset in the results based upon hand-preference. For instance, I was faster to shoot whites than blacks, when I know I have at least some racist preference towards whites. This is because I am left-handed, skewing the results. There is a better test at:

This test switches hands, so as to mitigate the effects of hand preference, and uses more reasonable gauging methods; they test the speed of associations between blacks and whites and good and bad words. Honestly, now that I think about it, this test deserves to be posted.

There is also an extensive battery of other tests for those of you inclined to investigate.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I gave whites 1 hundredth of a second longer than blacks. I got shot by one black person, and killed an innocent white person.

I stopped reading after the 10th comment or so, but I'm not sure this is a 100%, end-all, foolproof, scientifically accurate test of whether someone is racist or not...

Also, the only thing this showed to me is that my face really starts to itch when I cannot scratch it. :)
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I shot whites 0.579 seconds and blacks .624 seconds... for both it was nearly .1 seconds more to holster. But I think that's due to being right handed, and the z being on the left. I agree with earlier comments that it had more to do with contrast of what was surrounding the object/gun.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)

I took the test with the intention of finding out if it would allow me to shoot people indiscriminately and to continue to do so.

So I pressed on the button rapid-fire. I never even saw any of the pictures of the people pop up, I only saw backgrounds. Yet it still stated that I waited longer for white people than for black people.

I tried it over again. Same result.

Now I started to wonder.

Third time... same.
Fourth time... same.
Fifth time... same.

I can buy it happening two or even three times in a row. But not five. This thing is rigged.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Can't really be that accurate, especially if you know it's a racism-related test beforehand. There are other factors - intentionally or unintentionally, it may be easier/harder to see the white/black people's guns/phones/etc.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.
Click here to access all of this post's 90 comments

Email This Post to a Friend
"How Racist Are You?"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.


Success! Your email has been sent!

close window

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
Learn More